These judgements are uploaded by our esteemed readers. If you have a judgement on an important topic that you would like to share with others, please use this form to upload it
Ramprasad Kamtaprasad Nigam v. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment -Disallowance of claim under section 54 of the Act-Levy of penalty is not justified. [S. 54] The assessee made an investment in SRA project and claimed exemption under section 54 of the Act . The claim was disallowed and the assessee has not filed an appeal against the disallowance. The Assessing… Read More ...
Dombivali Paper Mfg. Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Bogus purchases-Estimate of income-Ex-parte order-Penalty is deleted-Tribunal also observed that when the necessary facts and circumstances and material on the basis of which, the issue in the appeal has to be decided, are already on record, this Tribunal would be slow in directing such remand which may ultimately lead to multiplicity of… Read More ...
The Bombay Society of the Salesian Sisters India, v. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai Tribunal : S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Expenditure incurred for renovation of school building and payment of taxes - Allowable as application of income though the assessee is not owner of the building. [S. 11(1)(a)] The appellant had incurred an expenditure on repairs/renovation of the school building and towards payment of property taxes.… Read More ...
Court on its own motion v. Virendra Singh, Advocate (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court : Contempt of Courts Act , 1971 . S. 2(c)(i) : Contempt of Court-Criminal contempt-For making Scandalous , unwarranted and baseless imputations against several sitting Judges of the High Court and district Courts-Court has sentenced a lawyer to six months imprisonment after holding him guilty of criminal contempt. [S. 5, 14, 15] Contemnor has made certain… Read More ...
Sunderlal Bajaj HUF v. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
Delhi Tribunal: S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Recording of satisfaction -Additional ground-Question of law admitted-Document Identification Number / Document Number (DIN/DN)- CBDT circular -Binding on the Assessing Officer-Not mentioned in the assessment order-Order is quashed and set aside. [S. 119, 143(3), 254(1), 292B] Before the Tribunal the assessee has raised an additional ground based on… Read More ...
Central Bank of India v. Superfine Profile and Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. (NCLT Mumbai)
NCLT, Mumbai Bench: The NCLT has inter alia held that the date of default with respect to a corporate guarantor is the date on which the guarantor fails to make payment after being called upon to pay, and that the date of default of the principal borrower is not relevant for determining the date of default of the… Read More ...
Rajesh G Jain Vs Income Tax Officer Ward–2(2), Thane Park (ITAT Mumbai)
ITAT Mumbai D Bench: Whether sundry creditors arising out of Bogus purchases (Hawala Transactions) and remaining outstanding as at the year-end can be added to the Total Income u/s 68 as Cash credits. -NO- Such creditors can be added u/s 41(1) only as Income includes benefit due to Remission or Cessation of Liability by way of writing off such… Read More ...
DHVANIL HEMENDRA RESHAMWALA Versus INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(1) (Gujarat High Court)
Gujarat High Court : Gujarat High Court quashes and sets aside the Assessment Order passed in violation of the provisions of S.144B of the Income Tax Act as the mandatory procedure of providing the draft assessment order along with show cause notice was not issued in the present case. Read More ...
MANESH DAYASHANKAR MADEKA VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1) & ANR. (Supreme Court)
Supreme Court : Non - speaking order of Dismissal passed by High Court in absence of follow up reasoned order is invalid : Hon'ble Supreme Court Read More ...
M/S AMIT HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (Gujarat High Court)
Gujarat High Court : The Bench comprising of Hon'ble Chief Justice Sunita Agrawal and Hon'ble Justice AP Mayee, Gujarat High Court holds that Section 119(2)(b) Application under the Income Tax Act,1961 cannot be rejected citing vague and arbitrary reasons that there was no genuine hardship caused to the Petitioner. The Court also observed that the application cannot be rejected… Read More ...